Course outline

Conversational/journal style.

Ateneo Law Journal

UP Law Journal
Harvard Law Journal

Proposal: Amendment of Compensation Law

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/how-the-wrongfully-convicted-are-compensated/

https://www.innocenceproject.org/compensating-wrongly-convicted/

https://www.jstor.org/stable/40752642?seq=1#page_scan_tab_contents

https://www.jstor.org/stable/43895627?seq=1#page_scan_tab_contents

https://www.npr.org/2018/11/30/670180358/fighting-for-compensation-after-a-wrongful-
conviction-and-38-years-in-prison

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/how-the-wrongfully-convicted-are-compensated/

https://www.pewtrusts.org/en/research-and-analysis/blogs/stateline/2017/03/14/what-do-states-
owe-people-who-are-wrongfully-convicted

https://edition.cnn.com/interactive/2012/03/us/table.wrongful.convictions/

https://www.oxfordscholarship.com/mobile/view/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199271207.001.0001/a
cprof-9780199271207-chapter-15

https://www.innocenceproject.org/nevada-governor-signs-the-strongest-compensation-law-in-the-
country/

https://www.pewtrusts.org/en/research-and-analysis/blogs/stateline/2017/03/14/what-do-states-
owe-people-who-are-wrongfully-convicted

https://big.assets.huffingtonpost.com/wise.pdf

In the Philippines

https://www.doj.gov.ph/victims-compensation-program.html

RA 7309
http://hrlibrary.umn.edu/research/Philippines/RA%207309%20-
%20%20Law%20Creating%20the%20Board%20Of%20Claims.pdf

Review and Amendment

http://ateneolawjournal.com/Media/uploads/aa90f8e6a3754c2c9a445e3bfa6c8828.pdf

http://www.congress.gov.ph/legisdocs/basic_17/HB03891.pdf

http://www.congress.gov.ph/legisdocs/basic_17/HB03283.pdf

https://news.mb.com.ph/2017/12/28/review-body-on-wrongful-convictions-sought/

http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/0000016caead9fa02b6c6fbd003600fb002c009e/p/A
PH388/?username=Guest&device=ipad

http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/0000016caeada5b68a1ff86e003600fb002c009e/p/A
PG874/?username=Guest&device=ipad
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/0000016caeadf1b8ffee1d48003600fb002c009e/p/A
UD133/?username=Guest&device=ipad

DNA evidence rule (post-conviction remedy)

https://lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2007/oct2007/am_06_11_5_sc_2007.html

http://ateneolawjournal.com/Media/uploads/210245c8afcc31d961b4e3f944eb6847.pdf

History of DNA Evidence Rule

https://www.gmanetwork.com/news/scitech/science/537795/a-brief-history-of-dna-evidence-in-
philippine-jurisprudence/story/

Requirements:

Aug. 27-28 3 title proposals with rationale

Sept. 3-4 Final Title Proposal
Sept. 17-18 Chapter 1 Background of the Study
October 8-9 Chapter 2 Review of Related Lit (not less than 10 books and 10 journal/internet
references with proper citation)
October 22-23 Chapter 3-Methodology
Nov. 12-13 Revised Chapters 1-3 for proposal defense
Nov. 19-29 Final Paper for proposal defense
Nov. 29 and Dec. 6 Proposal defense
Thesis Topic Proposal: The need to revise the provisions of RA 7309, particularly section 3
which expressly states that wrongfully convicted persons are covered by the law,
and section 4, which says that the maximum amount of compensation for
wrongfully convicted persons is P1000 per month, with every fraction being
counted as one month.

Title: To Give Back What Was Wrongfully Taken Away:

Revisiting the Compensation Provisions of RA 7309 for the Wrongfully Convicted

Rationale:

Whereas, Republic Act 7309 was enacted in 1992.

Whereas, Republic Act 7309 created the Board of Claims.

Whereas, the Board of Claims was designated as the proper administrative body where
wrongfully convicted persons may file claims for compensation for the wrongful
conviction.

Whereas, section 3 expressly states that wrongfully convicted persons are covered by the
law.

Whereas, section 4 says that the maximum amount of compensation for wrongfully
convicted persons is P1000 per month of imprisonment, with every fraction being
counted as one month.

Whereas, the DNA Evidence Rule took effect on October 15, 2007.

Whereas, sections 6 and 10 of the DNA evidence rule expressly provide for the procedure
to allow the exoneration of persons who were wrongfully convicted.

Whereas, in spite of the 15-year gap between the DNA evidence rule and Republic Act
7309, there has been no revision in the latter to address the circumstances which
the DNA evidence rule sought to address.

Whereas, in 2004, US Congress enacted a compensation law for wrongfully convicted

individuals, granting exonerated persons $50,000 for each year spent in prison.

Whereas, the landmark decision of the Supreme Court of the State of New York in The
People of the State of New York v. Wise, Richardson, McCray, Salaam, and
Santana effectively vacated the convictions against the five men awarding them
compensation totaling $41 million for their wrongful convictions.

Whereas, the State of Nevada recently passed the strongest compensation law found in
the United States of America.

Whereas, the Supreme Court of the Republic of the Philippines has expressly stated in the
People of the Republic of the Philippines v. Mateo, out of 907 cases of where the
convictions resulted in the imposition of death penalty, after review, 65 of these
cases were subsequently acquitted.

Whereas, the Philippine Congress has failed to incorporate the recent trend among
jurisdictions of granting wrongfully convicted persons materially significant
monetary compensation after their exoneration

Whereas, the author will seek to prove the need to revisit and amend the provisions of
Republic Act 7309 accordingly to properly and more appropriately compensate
persons wrongfully convicted who will be exonerated in the future.
Thesis Topic Proposal: The legal merits of a Petition for Writ of Mandamus to compel the PNP to
properly collect and preserve DNA evidence in criminal investigations

Title: The Cost of Flimsy Hands: The Merits of a Petition for a Writ of Mandamus Against the
Philippine National Police to Appropriately Collect and Preserve DNA Evidence
in Criminal Investigations in Light of their Failure to do so.

Rationale:

Whereas, the DNA Evidence Rule was took effect on October 15, 2007.

Whereas, the DNA Evidence Rule provides for the procedure whereby DNA evidence may be
used to exonerate wrongfully convicted persons.

Whereas, under Section 6 of the DNA evidence rule, it is a requisite that a biological example
exists in order to avail of the remedy in section 10 which provides for the
procedure for exoneration.

Whereas, the Innocence Project-Philippines Network attempted to look for cases where DNA
evidence was available in order to test claims of wrongful convictions.

Whereas, after the efforts of the Innocence Project-Philippines Network, it was found that there
were NO CASES where DNA evidence was available.

Whereas, the Philippine National Police enjoy the presumption of regularity.

Whereas, the presumption of regularity means that the Police are presumed to properly carry out
their duties during criminal investigations

Whereas, the unavailability of DNA evidence was found to have been partly caused by police
negligence in their failure to collect said evidence or, even if the same was
collected, to preserve the same.

Whereas, the circumstance of the absence of DNA evidence in criminal investigations definitely
overcome the presumption of regularity and prove police negligence in
investigations.

Whereas, the unavailability of DNA evidence has made the exoneration of persons wrongfully
convicted legally impossible in cases where the conviction has become final and
executory.

Whereas, the right to life and liberty are the highest in the hierarchy of supreme fundamental
rights.

Whereas, the failure to collect and preserve DNA evidence effectively deprives victims of
wrongful convictions any remedy which may allow their exoneration

Whereas, this possible deprivation warrants the legal necessity to grant a petition for the writ of
mandamus to compel the Philippine National Police to collect and preserve DNA
evidence in criminal investigations.
http://www.pnp.gov.ph/images/Manuals_and_Guides/DIDM/Field-Manual-on-Investigation-of-
Crimes-of-Violence-and-other-Crimes.pdf
Thesis Topic Proposal: Comparison of trust ratings or satisfaction ratings between jurisdictions
where judges and justices are elected as opposed to those where judges and
justices are appointed.

Title: Justice By The People and For The People: A Comparison of the Level of Trust Reposed
by the People in the Judiciary in Jurisdictions where Members of the Bench are
Elected as opposed to Appointed

Rationale:

Whereas, the members of the Bench of the Republic of the Philippines are all appointed by the
President.

Whereas, there are other jurisdictions which provide for the election of judges and justices.

Whereas, there has long been an acknowledgement of the existence of the “padrino” system.

Whereas, the “padrino” system creates the image that it becomes easier to become a member of
the Bench when one is closely acquainted to, or knows some who is so
acquainted, with the president of the Republic of the Philippines.

Whereas, the 1987 Constitution specifically provides for the appointment of members of the
Bench by the President.

Whereas, this study may prove useful in a possible amendment to the Constitution, should it be
proven that people will have greater trust in a justice system where they elect
judges and justices.